Financial Fraud Course: Why an Auditor Should Think Like a Prosecutor

A defendant can rob more money by using a computer than with a gun and a ski mask. Concerns about public perception sometimes prevent the reporting of these cases by businesses, even when a skilled auditor uncovers the misdeeds. Oftentimes, it is a betrayal of trust by an employee or business partner. The penalties for these financial crimes are also far less harsh at the time of sentencing than a violent crime like armed robbery. This gives more savvy defendants further incentive to choose this means of exploitation, and they often amass many victims over several years before being caught.  

Once great auditors and investigators catch them, the real work begins: convincing prosecutors like me that it is worth the time and resources of their offices to go after these defendants (who frequently reside far away in other jurisdictions).  By thinking like a prosecutor, auditors will not only be far more effective at catching scammers, they will be far more likely to have them convicted of their crimes because they will speak the same language as the person analyzing their case to see if it should be brought into a courtroom.

Course participants will learn the five types of evidence (Direct, Circumstantial, Testimonial, Physical and Other Crimes) and hear real-life examples of what prosecutors look for when following the paper trail of these cases. These case studies help auditors learn the signs for detecting fraud in their own investigations.

Additionally, course participants will understand the five defenses that will come up in these cases (I did not do it; Someone else did it; I wasn't thinking when I did it; I was justified; and I was framed) and how good investigators can overcome these defenses by recognizing them at an early stage.

Finally, course participants will learn about creating an ethics committee and developing an internal culture that does not tolerate corruption.